Cgit-1 Delhi order dated 27.03.2026 D-1/06/2026 Sudhir Kumar vs Regional P.F. Commissioner & Anr on 27 March 2026

1. The appellant has filed the present appeal challenging an order of rejection of his prayer for release of EPF dues by the respondents under section 7-I of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short the “EPF Act”).

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant upon the question of maintainability of the present appeal in this Tribunal under the EPF Act.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the respondents had illegally rejected the prayer of the appellant for the release of his outstanding EPF dues. Learned counsel for the appellant has further argued that the appellant had filed the present appeal under section 7-I of the EPF Act as the impugned order was passed by the respondent under sub-section (1) of section 7A of the EPF Act. Learned counsel for the appellant has pleaded that the present appeal of the appellant was fully maintainable under section 7-I of the EPF Act.

4. Admittedly, the appellant has filed the present appeal against the respondents under section 7-I of the EPF Act. The contents of section 7-I of the EPF Act are being reproduced here for facility of reference:- 7-I Appeals of Tribunal.- (1) Any person aggrieved by a notification issued by the Central Government, or an order passed by the Central Government or any authority, under the proviso to sub-section (3), or sub-section (4) of section 1, or section 3, or sub-section (1) of section 7A, or section 7B [except an order rejecting an application for review referred to in sub- section (5) thereof], or section 7C, or section 14B, may prefer an appeal to a Tribunal against such notification or order.

Sudhir Kumar Vs. Regional P.F. Commissioner & Anr.

(2) Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be filed in such form and manner, within such time and be accompanied by such fees, as may be prescribed].

5. Thus, it would be seemed that any appeal can be filed before this Tribunal only if the conditions specified in section 7-I of the EPF Act are fulfilled.

6. Through the present appeal, the appellant has challenged an order passed by A.O./ APFC, Patna rejecting his prayer for release of his Provident Fund dues. I have carefully examined all the provisions of the EPF Act specifically laid down in section 7-I of the EPF Act the orders passed under which could be appealed against through an appeal before this Tribunal. The impugned order passed by the respondent was not passed under sub-section (1) of section 7A of the EPF Act as claimed by the counsel for appellant. In fact, the order being challenged by the appellant through this appeal is not covered under any of the specific provisions laid down in section 7-I of the EPF Act.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant has also failed to show any other specific provision in the EPF Act permitting him to file an appeal before this Tribunal under the EPF Act.

8. In this background, the present appeal of the appellant is clearly not maintainable before this Tribunal under the EPF Act.

9. Hence, the present appeal of the appellant is hereby dismissed as being not maintainable in law.

10. Case file be consigned to the Record Room. Sd/- (Ajay Kumar Jain)

Presiding Officer CGIT-cum-Labour Court, Delhi-1

27.03.2026